DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No.. 2018-19 Ref: Signature Date From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD OF FORMER SR . Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. §1552 (b) SECDEF Memo of 3 Sep 14 “Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Discharge Upgrade Requests by Veterans Claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder” (c) PDUSD Memo of 24 Feb 16 “Consideration of Discharge Upgrade Requests Pursuant to Supplemental Guidance to Military Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records by Veterans Claiming PTSD or TBI” (d) USD Memo of 25 Aug 17 “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual Harassment” (e) USECDEF Memo of 25 Jul 2018 “Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations” Encl: (1) DD Form 149 (2) Advisory Opinion (AO) of 11 Feb 20 1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his characterization of service be changed to “Honorable,” his narrative reason for separation changed to “Convenience of the Government,” and his reentry code changed to “RE-1.” Enclosures (1) and (2) apply. 2. The Board, consisting of reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 10 July 2020, and pursuant to its regulations, determined that the partial corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of Petitioner’s naval records, applicable statutes, regulations, policies, post-service medical diagnosis and enclosure (2), an advisory opinion (AO) provided by a Navy mental health professional. 3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows: a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy. b. Although enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to review the application on its merits. c. Petitioner enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 21 October 1991. On 23 January 1992, medical personnel determined that he was not considered mentally ill but manifests a longstanding disorder of character and behavior, which was of such severity as to render him incapable of serving adequately in the Navy. Petitioner’s original service record was incomplete and did not contain any documentation pertaining to his separation from the Navy. Based on Petitioner’s Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD 214), on 12 February 1992, he received an uncharacterized, entry-level separation (ELS) due to being diagnosed with a Personality Disorder, and he was assigned a reentry code of RE-3G -Condition (not a physical disability) interfering with the performance of duty. d. Through counsel, Petitioner claims that, at the time of his discharge, the underlying basis of his separation was procedurally defective and the adverse action and administrative discharge were unfair. He asserts that now, the entry-level separation is inequitable. e. The Board noted that Petitioner was notified that he was being processed for separation within 180 days of the beginning of his period of active service. Navy regulations authorize an uncharacterized ELS if the processing of a Sailor for separation begins within 180 days of a Sailor’s entry on active duty. f. The Board noted that Petitioner’s assignment of an RE-3G reentry code was the most favorable reenlistment code based on his circumstances. The RE-3G reentry code may not prohibit reenlistment, but requires that a waiver be obtained from recruiting personnel who are responsible for determining whether or not an individual meets the standards for reenlistment. g. Enclosure (2) notes that Petitioner had an in-service diagnoses of Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood, Personality Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified with Borderline, Dependent and Avoidant Features. Petitioner was recommended for administrative separation due to unsuitability for continued service. There are no clinical records or other evidence presented that the Petitioner was diagnosed with PTSD in-service or post-service. Petitioner’s administrative discharge was an Entry Level Separation based on Personality Disorder and unsuitability for continued service, not on misconduct. CONCLUSION Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants partial favorable action. Although he was diagnosed with a personality disorder, the Board concludes that, his DD Form 214 should be changed to read that the narrative reason for his discharge was “Secretarial Authority” to eliminate the possibilities of invasive questions. The Board voted to leave the characterization of service as “Entry Level Separation (Uncharacterized),” and reentry code as “RE-3G.” The Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in references (b) through (e). Specifically, the Board considered whether his application was the type that was intended to be covered by these policies. In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following partial corrective action. RECOMMENDATION Petitioner’s naval record is corrected to show that on 12 February 1992, his reason for discharge was “Secretarial Authority.” Petitioner be issued a new DD Form 214. No further action be granted. A copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. Upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs is informed that Petitioner’s application was received by the Board on 8 February 2019. 4. It is certified that quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter. 5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy. 8/24/2020 Executive Director